This blog is a great opportunity to share ideas about ways to
transform schooling as we know it, to help all students realise their
talents, passions and dreams. Be great to hear from anyone out there! Feel free to add a comment to Bruce's Blog and enter e-mail to receive postings

I suggest teachers take educators Thomas Sergiovani’s advice
to ‘build in canvas’. By this he means look as if you are doing what is
expected while dramatically changing the approach to the literacy and numeracy
times. The building in canvas metaphor relates to the construction of canvas
tanks in the Iraq war to fool the enemy. This means introducing as much applied
reading and maths as you can tied into the current inquiry study.

The key belief is to see the current inquiry topic as
providing the energy and inspiration for most of what goes on in the school
day and to personalise learning for each student.

An inquiry based programme is in direct conflict with the
formulaic deterministic ‘best practice’ teaching that has become the norm in
most schools. By the over use of such things as success criteria, intentional
teaching, feed-forward ‘next step’ teaching, and a ‘we are going to learn’
model (WALTS) too much student work lacks individual creativity. Teachers who
use such things need to encourage their students to ensure whatever they do
expresses their individuality – except in such things as spelling and practical
maths. We are talking about a personalised approach to learning rather than a
standardised one.

A creative inquiry based classroom centres around students
(and teachers) working together to solve what some writers called ‘messy’,
‘wild’, fertile’ or ‘generative’ topics. This exploratory or ‘emergent’
approach to learning is, as mentioned, in conflict with current approaches but
it is a creative approach for both teachers and students.To succeed teachers need to follow educationalist
Jerome Bruner’s advice that ‘teaching is the canny art of intellectual
temptation’. Whatever students are tempted to do should be done in depth –
‘fewer things should be done well’

By such means the shape of the day retains much of what is
currently seen but instead of the ‘evil twins of literacy and numeracy gobbling up the
entire curriculum’ (as one UK commentator has written) they become integral to
the development of the gifts and talents of all students.

Such classrooms value personalised diagnostic assistance to
learners in areas of shown need so all students’ can achieve quality learning.
The best evidence of learning is to be seen in what the students’ have achieved
(exhibitions, wall displays, demonstrations, presentations, electronic
portfolios) and but most importantly by their students’ confidence to apply
skills and knowledge gained to new situations. In such classrooms both teachers
and students can show how all aspects of learning, including attitudes, have improved.

﻿

Ewan McIntosh

It was suggested to me that I should listen to a video presentation given by Ewan McIntosh at a recent Thinking Conference (Jan 2013) because his
ideas challenge the pre-deterministic’ best practices’ currently to be seen in
classrooms. His presentation was titled ‘The Problem Finders’ and in it he
explores the process creative professionals use and how they can be applied to
support creative dynamicand deeper thinkers. Brilliant stuff - find time to watch

Creative people, he says, have four qualities:

1 They know why they
do what they do.

They see the whole problem and then they work on the hard
parts (David Perkin’s advice). Ewan referred to Guy Claxton’s 6 pillars of
learning that one learning must have (1) challenge (2) be collaborative(3)
provide responsibility (4) respect learner’s ideas (5) be about real things (6)
provide choices.

﻿﻿2 They are agent provocateurs.

﻿﻿﻿

Picasso - agent provocateur!

They provoke learning. Schools should not involve students
in questions that can be answered by ‘Google’. Students need to discover by
themselves – to transform what they know. Students need ‘messy’ learning
situations to develop generative thinking that unfolds as students dig deeper.
Students need to find their own problems.

3 They trust the process.

Creative people trust that new thinking will evolve through
the design process. First they begin to explore the chosen area and are on the
alert for ‘leads’ to occur; then they begin to define areas to research; then
ideas to solve problems; from this developing ‘prototypes’ which provide
feedback to improve. The first steps are divergent and then ideas converge.

Teachers, McIntosh, do too much of the planning (problem
seeking) themselves. Instead they should start learning with the students. (So
much for all this pre-determined learning). Give students a chance to wonder,
to develop their own ‘juicy’ questions. Help students define the problem and
possible solutions. Don’t assess results too early!

4 Creative people live to perform.

Preforming your learning is so important. Students need
opportunities to exhibit, demonstrate, show and tell about what they have
learnt. Students need opportunities to feel their work is memorable. ‘To
achieve great things’ McIntosh quotes, ‘two things are needed a plan and not
enough time.’ If given the opportunity children can learn by themselves.

Seems to me McIntosh is describing what creative teachers
do. McIntosh is elaborating the ‘community of scientists and artists’ of Elwyn
Richardson or describing how teachers can ensure that all students develop
positive creative learning identities able, as the 2007 New Zealand Curriculum
says, to able to ‘seek, use and create their own knowledge’.

With a creative mind-set teachers can transform their
classrooms into personalised learning communities, and if they are clever (by
‘building in canvas’), those in authority might never notice. And, in a way, it
won’t matter if students are producing amazing results. Such creative teachers
will be able to gain some sort of immunity.

Extinguished Guest Writer

Phil Cullen

Ex Director Primary Schools Queensland

The Janus Look

I’m
totally disillusioned and disappointed by the lack of interest in the effects of
NAPLAN on the lives of young Australian children shown by those who should care
more than they do about child development and the nasty treatment of children at
school. As a consequence. I worry a great deal about the future of our great
country. I’ve been around for a while, done a lot of things connected to primary
schooling, so I’d like to share an overview of what I reckon has happened during my life with kids; and then predict what is likely to happen.

I
took over my first classroom in May 1946. I was so proud. I had always wanted to
be a primary school teacher and I had arrived! I still love primary schooling 67
years later. Love it. Love it. Love it.

I
started teaching in the way that I was taught, the way that everybody seemed to
teach...from the front of the classroom near a blackboard with a desk and large
space all of my own, spending a lot of time yapping my head off across a
demilitarised zone to the youngsters who sat still in a confined space all day
facing me. It was standard practice.The techniques were based on fear. Teachers had taught this way for hundreds
of years, since the Dame Schools, Charity Schools and Common Schools first tried
teaching in groups. Such explicit, didactic, sermonising forms of instruction
featured, as a rule, some pretty nasty bang, crash, wallop techniques. They only
worked for a few easily frightened kids. – of
the birch, of endless repetitive listings, of detention and public disgrace –
applied to learning. We all believed in the prevailing dogma that children would
not pass any examinations unless they were roused enough to fear the
consequences of failure.

When
Grammar Schools wanted to judge the scholastic ability of those who might be
allowed to enter their hallowed halls, written tests for applicants became
favoured, so much so that governments took over their preparation, publication
and distribution. In my home state, it was called the Scholarship Examination.
From it, the examination bug went feral. Those that could ‘pass’ them were
offered privileges; those who couldn’t were dumped. The successful continued
being schooled in a new arrangement of classroom setting, based on subjects that
could be tested. The rest were not wanted at school and had to educate
themselves out in the big bad world at about fourteen years of age. Not the best
of schooling models, but the only one we knew. All children were schooled
following the premise that universities wanted only the best scholars and
schools should prepare everyone for a likely academic future. Schools were not
run for ‘also rans’.

This
sort of toxic psychology lasted for some years and, to my eternal shame, I was a
part of it. I wasted midnight oil, school time and professional gumption --
retarding children’s development by being crazily focused on testing. Then, I
realised that there is nothing honourable, nor ethical, nor professional about
stern blanket testing, especially the prevailing 2013 dirt-raking political kind
that is endemic to standardised external blanket testing. Never has been. Never
will be. It took two little Year 2 pupils to make me notice how much stress,
unhealthy competition, creative dullness and missed learning opportunities I was
causing. I just hadn’t given a thought to professional ethics nor to the
emerging knowledge about the school conditions necessary to help people to learn
with self-motivated enthusiasm....without fear. Others were learning that the
3Ls [Love, Laughter and Learning] were essentials for high performance in the
3Rs....while I was mistakenly chasing high performance through tests. Slow
learner that I was, I then did a complete 180 degrees. I now hate blanket
testing with origins beyond the schools with an intense hate, that I never
thought I could possess.

If
I had taught them learnacy, then top levels of personal numeracy and literacy
achievements would have come as a natural consequence, Hells, Bells and
Buggy-wheels, we have NAPLAN running our programs. The longer that Australia’s
NAPLAN has the kind of control that it has, the more that reasons arise for all
teachers to hate and despise Standardised Blanket Testing supplied by
non-local-school personnel. It stinks to high heaven and no form of it should
ever exist.

Real learning

This
model of test-based schooling, well entrenched in world schooling during my
early career and not much different from present-day SBTs like NAPLAN and having
the same negative effect on children, lasted in all western countries until the
1960s. In my home state, the rigorous Scholarship examination held at the end of
primary school was abandoned in 1962 and the most advanced, most exciting, most
learning focused period in the history of education memed itself around the
world during this period. It arrived in Australia with the greatest examples of
thought-provoking literature in history translated into a remarkable array of
learning based models of schooling. Principals started to grasp autonomy and run
their schools based on professionally based readings and personal research. What
decent principal has to wait for autonomy to be granted from up-high, anyhow?
What level-headed authority figure can claim to ‘grant autonomy‘ to somebody
else. [Fair go, Peter and your like-minded State Ministers Stop playing God.]
I’d love to list those schools that engaged in innovations that each principal
believed would work and did....different from each other - sure. I can’t list
them all. I’d leave out too many. If you give me a call, I’ll tell you about
some of those schools that proudly based their teaching on multi-aged groupings
or Emotions-ABC or play-way or thinking [de Bono style] or resource-rich subject
centred or mastery learning or Literature-based.... or one [but it applied to
many] which displayed “Living, Learning Laboratory” outside the school. The sign should now display “Testing Factory”.

The
1960s to 1980s was the most progressive period in history. It produced the
creative geniuses that have since provided us with more comfortable living and
working standards far beyond the expectations of the citizens of the period.
Schools and their clients were free to learn, free to innovate. The world
started to become a very small oyster. Achievement became self motivating; and
schools were starting to use shared and self-evaluation techniques that involved
the pupil, the parent and the teacher in the pursuit of excellence. A visit to a
fair-dinkum child-oriented classroom was so exciting one could almost touch the
LEARNING atmosphere. You could certainly feel it.

The
present encouragement of didactic modes of instruction did not have the high
priority that is now promoted in the test-based atmosphere of the classroom.
Indeed the teachers, moved off the stage and shared more face-to-face maieutic
and group modes than had ever been tried. It was working well. During this truly
Golden Age of Education [1960s-80s], children were enjoying the role of ‘pupil’
with a caring teacher: “I learn. You teach. We’ve got this contract. Treat me as
a pupil, not as a student!!” Today, in 2013, they should be internalising. “Hey
Teach, You’re breaking the contract. Get rid of this NAPLAN crap and get back to
pupilling.” NAPLAN now rules schooling. It shouldn’t; should it?

Even
the School Inspectors, once feared apostles of the testing regime and making
judgements about school quality from their own backboard tests and oral
questioning, changed during the 60s and 70s. Appointed from the outstanding
principals of the day, they free-ranged around their schools to assist in any
way they could. The knowledge that they had accumulated over extensive
experiences was shared. They knew what a good school was and what a bad school
was without using paper-and-pencil tests. They knew which was which within
minutes of arrival.They gathered pollen from the best practices that they had
experienced and better ideas blossomed. Some were working partners of the
State’s curriculum development. They worked with close contact to the specialist
curriculum officers and the State’s multi-representative PCC – Primary
Curriculum Committee. Quality control and guidance was at its peak. Curriculum
changes and their effects on classroom activities were moderated at the
classroom level and discussed with all and sundry as to effectiveness. Changes
were alive, accepted or rejected; a far cry from the time when curriculum
changes were received in the post.

[We
had learned over the years that top-down curriculum innovations originating from
desk-wallahs in centralised other places, just don’t work. New Maths,
Cuisenaire, Whole Word or Phonic based Reading are examples. Nothing that is not
endorsed unanimously by classroom teachers will work. That’s why NAPLAN, now in
charge of the curriculum, wont help anything. It’s taking longer to get rid of
than most execrable impositions have taken because the business- based cum
profit-making cum totalitarian political force imposing its dictatorial will on
the conduct of schooling is stronger than any previous.]

Things
were going well, until, in mid-1980s, befuddled academics with high level
politico-bureaucratic control absorbed a special scato-meme invented by
corporate managerialists from Up-over somewhere, who believed only in impersonal
structural alterations just for the sake of change. In scatological terms, it
came from the bottom of the pit. In my state, the Education Minister and the
Director-General, both of whom had had unpleasant experiences in their short
teaching careers decided to get rid of Inspectors and those sections that were
concentrating on curriculum delivery, teaching and learning and teacher
development and seemed to be enjoying it. The pair just didn’t like their own
lack of control over effective schooling and felt inadequate. So, they blatantly
manipulated fellow officers and deceitfully arranged for a ‘preferred option’ to
be preferred because it was the one that they wanted. With skilful adherence to
managerialism’s impersonal forms of structure, they arranged for learning
activities to be ‘outsourced’, introduced ‘performance indicators’ that relied
on best-written CVs and thespian skills, ‘down-sized’ the Inspectorate by
summarily removing their positions, and removed the school-experience-base of
primary and secondary schooling by getting rid of divisional control. Out went
any semblance of an Education Department that was supposed, from time
immemorial, to be school based.

They
made things easy for a rookie Premier, under the influence of managerial
high-flyers such as Peter Coaldrake and Kevin Rudd to confuse the public service
generally...especially the caring services.

This
kind of organisation model, common to all Australian states and federal
governance, has devalued school experience, caring for kids, belief in teaching
as a pupilling enterprise, basic humanity and belief in professional
ethics...from the Australian school system. It’s been hellish for children and
caring teachers. It devalues down-to-earth, hands-on experience. It stinks.

NAPLAN
is the devil child of these kinds of irrelevant and irreverent changes to
schooling arrangements. Efficacy hawks and testucators,
quite unfamiliar with classroom practices, went wild with the blessing of Joel
Klein and his Australian agent, now PM, and have had a field day supporting the
destruction of learning development and belief in the human spirit. Small wonder
that little useful progress of the kind that was a probable dream in the 1980s
has been bastardised and that irreparable damage has been done to at least a
generation of our future citizens. Australia is now committed to mediocrity. Our
controllers just do not know what they are doing

What
a pity that we couldn’t have done what the Finns did in the 1980s? STOP and
THINK ! THINK. What goes on in those classrooms, we should be asking. It’s not
too late, if we are prepared to drop the stupidities completely, return the
dignity of the teaching profession to its owners, trust our schools to produce
the goods; and encourage a love for learning in each school child for his or her
entire school life, Australia can do it. It has a teaching force, that has been
the envy of the world. It needs to be trusted. It can lead the world if it
tries, not fall behind as it is doing now....thanks to NAPLAN.

Principals.
Stop being such gutless wonders. Reclaim your school. Reclaim your ethics.
Believe in your professional ethics and exercise that belief. Stop being a party
to the cruel outcomes of fear-based learning. You’ve been duped. No
half-measures. You can get rid of all of the stupidity by simply saying, “No
more”. Send the tests back, if your representatives have been too eichmannised
to act on your behalf.

Teachers. You
unfortunate pussy-cats. Your pleasant co-operative nature, part of your DNA, so
necessary for the most wonderful of the caring professions, is being
compromised. Your professional leaders are letting you down and your unions have
deserted you. Believe in yourselves again. Things are tough for you. You can
tell the parents of your pupils how you feel and advocate that they opt-out by
removing their children from the May tests. It’s so easy. You are also part of
an enormous, locally-influential voting bloc. You do have power if you wish to
exercise it. Just talk about NAPLAN to everyone you meet.

Parents. You can help
by sending a simple note to your child’s school, telling it that you opt-out.
Also, you vote. So do teachers. If, together perhaps, you ask your local
candidates where they stand in regard to the banning of NAPLAN with the
intention of voting only for those who would ban it, there would certainly be
more political thought about the pestilence.

Are schools suffering from Eichmanism?

Politicians. You can
show a bit of spunk in your party meetings. Until now, you will have heard
little of NAPLAN mentioned, because Peter and Christopher have you by the short
and curlies. Think of what they are trying to do to your child. Think about
Australia’s future. Mouthing commands, platitudes and ‘We will do it.” is all
hot air without decent Aussie, fair-dinkum, experience-based care to back up
their meadow mayonnaise. THINK!

In
the early 1980s, I dreamed of a wonderful future of happy children at school –
right through to Year 12 – bursting a boiler to get to school each day
because of all the rich learning experiences that they could
share. Shared evaluation of efforts to achieve at the highest level
would change to self-evaluation as the pupils moved through school and would
continue through life. The development of happy, exciting achievements in
learning was on the way. My closer primary school colleagues of the 80s and I
could feel the joys of learning in primary schools spreading, and, between us we
had more experience at recognising learning improvement than most. We foresaw
that the children at school at the time would love whatever they had to do and
would constantly try to do better....whether it was digging a neat ditch or
solving a tricky bit of space science. Learning would become a part of a happy,
useful life-style. Ah well!

Then
came managerialism....square pegs in charge...encouraged by a ridiculous,
verging on a stupid, political take-over of school-based learning
enterprises....pushing around compliant high-level pussy-cats who don’t give a
rats about kids.

Dreams
shattered. Truly, Today’s NAPLAN control of schooling in Australia is
devastating and disgusting. The longer NAPLAN exists, the worse it will get.You
can bet on it.

Poor
little Treehorn. His parents, teachers and principals still ignore his problems
and those of his school mates.

Friday, February 22, 2013

A few themes in New Zealand over the last couple of weeks, all
derivative of GERM 101 as practised around the world. The process to implement
charter schools continues, with an emphasis on employing unqualified teacher
‘experts’ - yes that’s the expression used by a government MP. The Christchurch
earthquake has been used as the justification to ‘reorganise’ schooling in
Christchurch, with charter schools in the mix. Seems that schools in lower
socio-economic areas have been listed as closing/merging, while schools in
richer areas will continue. Government proposals for charter schools have lower
socio-economic areas of Auckland and Christchurch as the preferred options for
the first charter schools. Is there a rat to be smelled here or is my nose
overly sensitive? Another theme, which has taken a while to arrive here, is the
demonisation of teacher unions by ‘tame’ journalists and commentators - also
straight out of GERM 101 handbook. Surprise, surprise.

And NZ and Australia and USA and ….. Guess
what - not a mention of standards, testing, achievement, inputs, outcomes,
performance pay and so on.

‘...just
as early years education was seen by the Victorians as little more than
child-minding which came cheap, so secondary education was accepted as being
specialised and expensive, and most often delivered away from the child’s local
home community. A century or more later primary education is still
allocated significantly fewer funds, and far less status, than secondary (which
means that classes are much larger when pupils are young, and smaller with more
direct teacher involvement, when they are older).’

“How
do we go from the natural curiosity of the two-year old to the practiced
detachment of the stereotypical teenager? What is it about school that teaches
kids to not care about their work — and by extension, their world?”

Also:

And if
we want our students to really be thoughtful scholars and citizens, don’t we
owe it to them to teach them how to think for themselves?

Who wants adults who
can think for themselves? Why, they may start to question the status quo. Can’t
have that.

A very important article by Bruce Hammonds.
We cannot afford to lose the voices of wisdom and experience!

‘ I am almost at a point of giving up my crusade for
creative education because it seems a losing battle. In
Australia ex Director of Primary Education Queensland Phil Cullen has finally
given up a long fight against the evils of an over emphasis on testing in basic
subjects.He is disappointed that teacher and principal
organisations did not have the courage to confront such politically inspired
approach.’

We don't want your thought control

Yup, Bruce and Phil. I
look around New Zealand and see what you mean. Much too quiet for my liking.

So called
‘best practices’ are now well established in our primary schools spread by
contractual advisers. While they may seem to offer schools a means to ensure
consistency across classrooms, even some degree of quality, they, if not used carefully
lead to the side-lining of creativity and individuality. It seems all class teachers
now use WALTS (we are learning that), success criteria, intentional teaching,
feedback and (teacher determined) feed-forward.

The trouble
is that all the above ‘best practice’ techniques is that they ‘teach’ the
students to replicate , or deliver, what the teacher believes to be the
indications of success.

This
creative mind-set makes a real difference. Such teachers would be appalled at
the clone like consistency of student work whether it is a science project,
language work and even the most creative area of all art.

A ‘community
of best practice’ follows the guidance of experts from outside of the school or
classroom while ‘learning organisations’ value the inspiration of creative
teachers.

The emphasis
chosen makes a big difference.

The current
government is pushing narrow ‘best practice’ approach to teaching by
emphasising testing and National Standards.

In contrast the side-lined 2007 New
Zealand Curriculum encourages a ‘learning organisation’ approach where each
learner is to be seen as a ‘seeker, user and creator of their own knowledge’.

I wishschools would take the advice of Sir Ken Robinson who sees the school’s main
role to develop the gifts and talents of all students. He also say that
‘creativity is as important as literacy and numeracy’ a thought that echoes Guy
Claxton who says ‘learnacy is as important as literacy and numeracy.

If the ideas
of Sir Ken and Guy Claxton ( and many others) were to be taken seriously, along
with the NZC ‘s phrase of students as seekers user and creators’ schools would
be totally transformed.

At least
‘best practice’ schools could add to their criteria that whatever is undertaken
the results should celebrate the individuality or creativity of every students.

Friday, February 15, 2013

Times are getting interesting. There are increasing numbers of
articles from Australia, USA and New Zealand that reflect a fight back against
GERM. This even includes news from the well known radical state of Texas…..

The situation in New Zealand is going from farce to farce with
barely time to recover between events and we must now start to wonder if GERM
in its present format will survive the year.The present government will soon be keeping an eye on the general
election at the end of 2014, especially as current polling suggests that a
Labour/Green coalition will get the numbers.

Australia is heading towards an election in September this year;
however given that the present Labor government introduced Naplan, it is not
likely that the more conservative Liberal Party will undo this. This means that
Australians have a bigger battle on their hands.

‘Here
are five fundamental insights that can guide and support educators as they
endeavor to integrate student creativity into the everyday curriculum.’

Education to develop gifts and talents

Creativity can’t be mandated, nor can
it be boxed into predetermined outcomes. Creativity by definition can’t be
predicted or imposed through technocratic WALTs and the like. It can’t be
‘assessed’ and graded. It can’t be tested although there are those who have
developed standardised testing for creativity, to decide whether creativity has
increased or declined. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that Pearson are
developing programmes to teach creativity.

Using Sir Ken as a starting point, this
article reinforces the previous article about creativity.

“And that’s what gets lost in a standardized curricula,
where the artistry is replaced by this dead language of delivery.”

While the battle
against GERM dominates at the moment, we must also keep our awareness on the
way ahead. GERM will be eliminated - there’s evidence that 2013 may be the
turning point. However, what will the post-GERM world be like? Educators must
be ready to reclaim the playing field, otherwise another imposed ideology may
take over.

Automatons, of course. Powers that be don’t
want a population who can think. Why, they may realise what is being done to
them, and object. Can’t have that. Keep them in their place, hence skills based
common core/national standards.

‘I am
a teacher because of the love I had for school. I loved my teachers. I loved
having fun while learning. I loved the interaction with my peers. I felt safe
and successful at school…even when I made mistakes.’

US educator Jamie McKenzie (always worth
reading) making a salient point: ‘Technology
is a false god, unlikely to do much for children unless schools focus on
learning and make huge investments in professional development.’

Teachers, like the
soldiers caught in no man’s area in World War One, were doomed no matter what
direction they chose. Today teachers seem just as confused not knowing whichagenda to follow and, worse still, oblivious to the agendas being imposed – all
too often exhausted just trying to implement what they are being asked to do.
To extend the theme teachers are all too often ‘led’ by principals, who like
World War One generals, have no idea what they are asking their teachers to do.
A s a consequence wrong decisions,
influenced by Ministry compliance requirements (National Standards – and the
inevitability of League Tables) and the surveillance culture created by the
Education Review Office, being made

Easier it seems to do
the wrong things well.

Forty year waves of change!

I read many years ago
that big world-wide trends come in 40 year waves influences all in their way.After the failure of capitalism resulting in
the Great Depression and also the waste of lives in World War Two Western societies developed welfare
societies in a democratic attempt to develop the potential of all citizens not
just the elite power holders. In New Zealand the first Labour Government
develop a range of state organisations and, as part of this, new liberal ideas
about education were promulgated. Every student was too receive an education
best suited to their needs.

The sixties were seen
as the high point of these world-wide changes. After the austerity and need
for security following World War Two the sixties, reflecting growing
prosperity, was a period of great
creativity challengingtraditional ideas
in all areas of life. Education was no exception. Child centred educationwas encouraged by the then Director of Education, Dr Beeby, In England child centred education was officially
recognised by the then government’s Plowden
Report (1967). In New Zealand
experimentation was also in the air. In 1964 pioneer creative teacher ElwynRichardson published his inspirational book ‘In the Early World’. Another
creative teacher Sylvia Ashton Warner also published her book ‘Teacher’. The
then Department of Education encouraged such developments. Junior teachers introduced developmental education, family
grouping, integrated programmes and in particular the language experience
/reading/writing approaches that were highly regarded worldwide. Another important influence was the work of
the art and craft advisers (led by the late National Director for Art and
Craft Gordon Tovey) which tapped into the creativity of teachers throughout New
Zealand.

Exciting times to be
a teacher.

By the 1980s economic
conditions had changed for the worse and new worldwide trend arose that was to change the direction of all
aspects of society and, once again education was not to be excluded.

This Neo-Liberal
‘wave’, based on ‘market forces’, individual responsibility, choice and the
centrality of a privatisation agenda
influenced all aspects of life.The
changes hit education with the introduction of Tomorrows Schools in 1986.
The Education Department, regional Education Boards school inspectors and
advisers were disbanded; proponents of the changes believed such bureaucracies
stultified individual school creativity. The baby was to be thrown out with the
bathwater! Schools were to be governed by Board of Trustees.

The market forces society!

Confusion and
ambiguity reigned supreme. Schools enjoyed the greater responsibility to
develop approaches that aligned with their philosophies (those that had them)
but soon it became apparent that the
freedom was in many ways an illusion as compliance requirements were imposed
by the Ministry of Education and achievements reported on by the Education
Review Office.The imposition
of the New Zealand Curriculum dictated to schools what was now to be expected.Countless learning objectives in eight
Learning Areas, arranged in arbitrary levels were to be assessed.

The revised 2007 New
Zealand Curriculum briefly provided both relief and inspiration – every student
to be seen as ‘a seeker, user and creator of their own knowledge.

This return to a
learner centred education was to be short lived. A new conservative government
set about imposing a return to a neo –liberal agenda based on business ‘bestpractices’. When ‘best practices’ are taken too seriously, as they are by
far too many schools (once again reflecting a lack of real educational
philosophy), creativity is crushed. As a result ‘communities of best practices may well be achievedresulting in conformity rather than
creativity. Formulaic ‘best practices’ becomes the norm.Examples to be seen are an emphasis on
teacher predetermined ‘learning intentions’, WALTs (we are learning that...);
success criteria and an obsession with recording achievement in literacy and numeracy.
Such ‘best practices’ do have value need
to account for creative individuals otherwise sameness is reflected in
classrooms.National Standards,
national testing and comparative ‘league tables’ are natural extensions of such
ideas as are value added assessment leading to teacher appraisals and
comparative school performance measurement.

So this brings us to
the future.

Each forty year wave
seems to sow the seeds for its own destruction. The freedom and creativity
of the sixties finally resulted in individual selfishness the basis of neo
liberal thinking. Welfare security led to a bureaucratic nightmare and middle
class capture. Neo liberal thinking in education creates conformity and narrowness
of thinking (teaching to the tests) requiring a new sense of creativity.

Two educators that
provide inspiration for future orientated teachers are Sir Ken Robinson and GuyClaxton – but they are only two of many innovative thinkers who are callingfor an educational transformation. Sir
Ken says the ‘creativity is as important as literacy and numeracy’ and believes
a future education system ought to focus on developing the gifts and talents of
all students. Guy Claxton has written that ‘learnacy is as important as
literacy and numeracy’. These ideas
are reinforced by the 2007 New Zealand Curriculum’s (currently side-lined) phrase for teachers to see students as ‘seekers,
users and creators of their own knowledge’.

Creativity as important as literacy

Currently, as one
commentator has written about primary schools, ‘it is as if the evil twins of
literacy and numeracy have all but gobbled up the entire curriculum’! ‘Best
practice’ becomes ‘fixed practice’. As for secondary schools they are still
locked in a traditional shape, with their timetables, subject compartmenting,
streaming, bells and uniforms, determined by the factory metaphor of an
industrial age.

A new world wide
theme is gaining strength. A world of connections. A world that needs to evolve
so as to be sustainable. A new fluid organic emerging world, continually recreating itself.
The importance of ecology in both natural and human communities. The
destructive ideology of market forces and individual greed is coming to an end.